They call them "standards" but they are very configurable. I can't even count the number of times, I was unable to import "DICOM" images to our "DICOM" PACS because of some slight change in the way the "Standard" was configured. Also we exchange images with some other facilities, and certain studies of ours arrive at their destination and can't be displayed. The "Standard" isn't all that standard.
I once thought similarly. I'm not so convinced now. I once thought that healthcare technology was just going to take awhile to get better at communicating. I now think the lack of communicating between various systems using the same standard (DICOM, HL7,etc) is intentional to get the Healthcare providers to only buy their product. HL7 is supposed to be a standard, but you have to look in multiple places for the data. One system will use one field and another will use another field for the same data. When you call the companies, they all want the other guys to change their system.
So the technology isn't helping the Provider's work flow.
Banks got their technology right. You can go to almost any bank and access your money. Not the same with healthcare. It just goes to prove you can mess with people's health and lives, but don't you dare mess with their money.
This is just a show - "I am doing something about this awful data breach problem."
If there any exemptions, you can bet it won't be the "little guy" getting them. More likely the "little guy" will be the example of the consequences. After all the "little guy" makes no significant political party contributions.
"If he really wanted to help, he would make MRI cheaper, because it is far more informative than ultrasound."
Not necessarily. Each medical imaging modality has its purpose. Ultrasound shows what is happening in real time. Eventually mainstream MRI will, too. Because of the required magnetic fields, I doubt MRI will ever be as portable as Ultrasound.
It seems that this all about the financial bottom line. I understand things cost money, but it would nice if there was, for once, more concern about human lives.
At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I think this particular outbreak is being publicized to create FUD. There have been outbreaks in the past that weren't nearly so well publicized. I think a few companies are close to having a cure/preventative and are using this FUD to get around a few regulations (we have a cure, but the rotten regulators won't let us use it and you could die because of the red-tape). I am not a fan of red tape, but to try to circumvent it for purely pecuniary reasons is not good, either.
There are no "standards". Things will eventually work together, but it'll cost you - or the Non-MS company. "Standards" is a buzzword to lull us into thinking that companies think about the end users and not just the bottom line.
I think most of your small ones are legitimate. "Tax system gamer" is hardly applicable, as the taxing agencies know how to get around the "tax-exempt" status. Even non-profits must generate some profit just to maintain. Most of them have no "paid" executives. Just a handful of people trying to carry out the mission of helping others. So, please, do help the small ones, if you are so inclined. They need all the help they can get.
Some of the Big Ones, I agree, are a little shady.
Yes, the consulting hours are a very lucrative incentive to have a "non-standard" standard. Our laboratory had a LIS installed. The EHR company charged alot of money to build an interface so the Lab Information could be sent to the EHR. So when our Radiology department installed a RIS, the EHR company charged alot of money to build a similar interface. As we went along in this process, it became apparent the the EHR company just "copied and pasted" the Radiology interface from the Lab interface. There was some "fine tuning" done so the Radiology system would quit getting Lab orders and vice versa. The Radiology results in the EHR look very similar to Lab results, which is not good, as Radiology reports are text notes, and the Lab results are numbers with reference ranges.
The HL7 "standard" has been perverted to make some companies very rich.
Complying with HL7 is right next to pointless. The HL7 standard is (despite its name) is NOT standard. One would think that patient demographics would be very easy to assign codes to. Unfortunately, there are many places the information can go and still be considered HL7 compliant. So if one system uses one of these sections and the other system uses another for the same data, they will be unable to effectively exchange information. Each of theses systems' companies will blame the other and insist the other one change their system or, better yet, that the facility using these systems dump the other and purchase their similar system. I believe this is intentional.
You don't see similar problems with electronic banking. As I am fond of saying: You can mess with peoples health and lives, but don't you dare mess with their money.
The sad part is, aside from the security issues, the HL7 "standard" is far from standard. The same goes for DICOM. What we need is a secure standard that is truly "secure" and "standard."
I wish more people had your attitude. Yes we have many problems that need to be worked on, but things could be much worse. I wish we COULD get more participation from the citizenry. The interest just isn't there. We seem to be too busy trying to keep things together (working to keep up on bills, trying to spend quality time with our families, trying to find some quality time for ourselves, etc.) to dedicate any significant time to something like public service. So we let those who want to spend that time do it and we wind up with many who are in it for all the wrong reasons (money, power, fame, etc.) running our cities, states, & country. To be fair, there are plenty of good people in our governments. There just aren't enough of them.
Strong magnetic fields have also been linked to brain tumors. There is still some argument about that, though. I can't remember if there has been any definitive answers.
I am really surprised by the number of people supporting this. I wonder how many would support having to wear one themselves.
You can rationalize it for nearly any occupation. Politicians should have to wear one 24 hours a day. I am sick of having to hear about off-duty antics and the subsequent investigations. With a camera, it would be simple to ascertain whether he/she slept with him/her. Someone already mentioned teachers. The list could go on and on.
At this rate, apparently we will not be safe until everyone is wearing a camera all the time.
Slashdot Mirror
...Somebody accidentally transposes two letters when using the dd command...
Did you intentionally transpose your "dd"?
Wow, "and on and on and on..."
It is amazing how much I take for granted.
They call them "standards" but they are very configurable. I can't even count the number of times, I was unable to import "DICOM" images to our "DICOM" PACS because of some slight change in the way the "Standard" was configured. Also we exchange images with some other facilities, and certain studies of ours arrive at their destination and can't be displayed. The "Standard" isn't all that standard.
I once thought similarly. I'm not so convinced now. I once thought that healthcare technology was just going to take awhile to get better at communicating. I now think the lack of communicating between various systems using the same standard (DICOM, HL7,etc) is intentional to get the Healthcare providers to only buy their product. HL7 is supposed to be a standard, but you have to look in multiple places for the data. One system will use one field and another will use another field for the same data. When you call the companies, they all want the other guys to change their system.
So the technology isn't helping the Provider's work flow.
Banks got their technology right. You can go to almost any bank and access your money. Not the same with healthcare. It just goes to prove you can mess with people's health and lives, but don't you dare mess with their money.
IS THIS SPARTA?!?!
This is just a show - "I am doing something about this awful data breach problem."
If there any exemptions, you can bet it won't be the "little guy" getting them. More likely the "little guy" will be the example of the consequences. After all the "little guy" makes no significant political party contributions.
Just an observation....
.005% more is legally intoxicated in most states. That is a might fine line to walk...
Are we really in such a hurry that a 3 minute swap needs improvement? It takes longer than that to use the restroom and buy a coffee.
I just don't understand why they have to bury the Time Capsule so deep.
"If he really wanted to help, he would make MRI cheaper, because it is far more informative than ultrasound."
Not necessarily. Each medical imaging modality has its purpose. Ultrasound shows what is happening in real time. Eventually mainstream MRI will, too. Because of the required magnetic fields, I doubt MRI will ever be as portable as Ultrasound.
"24-7-365"
I know I am off-topic, but why do people use that phrase?
Shouldn't it be "24-7-approximately 52.18" to avoid redundancy?
Here is a link that seems to support my previous comments: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/...
It seems that this all about the financial bottom line. I understand things cost money, but it would nice if there was, for once, more concern about human lives.
At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, I think this particular outbreak is being publicized to create FUD.
There have been outbreaks in the past that weren't nearly so well publicized. I think a few companies are close to having a cure/preventative and are using this FUD to get around a few regulations (we have a cure, but the rotten regulators won't let us use it and you could die because of the red-tape). I am not a fan of red tape, but to try to circumvent it for purely pecuniary reasons is not good, either.
There are no "standards". Things will eventually work together, but it'll cost you - or the Non-MS company. "Standards" is a buzzword to lull us into thinking that companies think about the end users and not just the bottom line.
I think most of your small ones are legitimate. "Tax system gamer" is hardly applicable, as the taxing agencies know how to get around the "tax-exempt" status. Even non-profits must generate some profit just to maintain. Most of them have no "paid" executives. Just a handful of people trying to carry out the mission of helping others. So, please, do help the small ones, if you are so inclined. They need all the help they can get.
Some of the Big Ones, I agree, are a little shady.
"new NEO?"
Is this a built-in redundancy?
I don't see why not. A 1.21 gigawatt power supply has been around for years.
Yes, the consulting hours are a very lucrative incentive to have a "non-standard" standard. Our laboratory had a LIS installed. The EHR company charged alot of money to build an interface so the Lab Information could be sent to the EHR. So when our Radiology department installed a RIS, the EHR company charged alot of money to build a similar interface. As we went along in this process, it became apparent the the EHR company just "copied and pasted" the Radiology interface from the Lab interface. There was some "fine tuning" done so the Radiology system would quit getting Lab orders and vice versa. The Radiology results in the EHR look very similar to Lab results, which is not good, as Radiology reports are text notes, and the Lab results are numbers with reference ranges.
The HL7 "standard" has been perverted to make some companies very rich.
DICOM is the same way
Complying with HL7 is right next to pointless. The HL7 standard is (despite its name) is NOT standard. One would think that patient demographics would be very easy to assign codes to. Unfortunately, there are many places the information can go and still be considered HL7 compliant. So if one system uses one of these sections and the other system uses another for the same data, they will be unable to effectively exchange information. Each of theses systems' companies will blame the other and insist the other one change their system or, better yet, that the facility using these systems dump the other and purchase their similar system. I believe this is intentional.
You don't see similar problems with electronic banking. As I am fond of saying: You can mess with peoples health and lives, but don't you dare mess with their money.
The sad part is, aside from the security issues, the HL7 "standard" is far from standard. The same goes for DICOM. What we need is a secure standard that is truly "secure" and "standard."
Sounds unsafe to me. Maybe a Class Action Lawsuit could be filed. "If you or a loved one..........."
I wish more people had your attitude. Yes we have many problems that need to be worked on, but things could be much worse. I wish we COULD get more participation from the citizenry. The interest just isn't there. We seem to be too busy trying to keep things together (working to keep up on bills, trying to spend quality time with our families, trying to find some quality time for ourselves, etc.) to dedicate any significant time to something like public service. So we let those who want to spend that time do it and we wind up with many who are in it for all the wrong reasons (money, power, fame, etc.) running our cities, states, & country. To be fair, there are plenty of good people in our governments. There just aren't enough of them.
Strong magnetic fields have also been linked to brain tumors. There is still some argument about that, though. I can't remember if there has been any definitive answers.
I am really surprised by the number of people supporting this. I wonder how many would support having to wear one themselves.
You can rationalize it for nearly any occupation. Politicians should have to wear one 24 hours a day. I am sick of having to hear about off-duty antics and the subsequent investigations. With a camera, it would be simple to ascertain whether he/she slept with him/her. Someone already mentioned teachers. The list could go on and on.
At this rate, apparently we will not be safe until everyone is wearing a camera all the time.
If this is the price, I don't want to be safe.
"You will be simulated."